To explain that exercise does not affect your weight, or impact on obesity rates

[allmyown]

I see this misconception all over MN every day.

Exercise is fantastic for your physical and mental health in many ways, but it is not a weight loss tool.

Posters are forever quoting energy in -minus energy out = energy stored, etc, as if we are petrol engines or something! we are not - this is not how our body works.

It is more like energy available / energy required to maintain weight= energy body decides to use.

Your body burns off excess energy if you are taking in more than your homeostatic systems think you need. Your body slows down and uses far less energy if you have taken in less than your homeostatic system thinks you need.

And so if you lose weight, and go below what your body wants you to be, then your metabolism will just slow down massively to make the weight go back on. And if you exercise a lot, your metabolism will just adjust to accommodate that.

The key to weight loss is making sure your homeostatic systems decide you should be a healthy weight. You can lower the weight your homeostatic systems is attempting to maintain, with healthy eating, cut out sugar, HPF, vegetable oil, margarine, and cut down on wheat.

Eat plenty of fresh food and greens, nothing long dated.

Unless you are running 10K every single day, you are not exercising enough to change your weight, and even if you are, it won't stay changed.

The obesity epidemic is related to sugar, highly processed food, vegetable oil, margarine, etc, and poor diet in general, not too little exercise.

But don't get me wrong, there are other health problems caused by too little exercise, I am not saying exercise is bad, just that an obese child is not necessarily a child getting inadequate exercise, as so many people seem to think.

Read "Why we eat too much" by Andrew Jenkinson, he explains the up to date science in so much more detail.

Maybe we're all different and our bodies work in different ways? Just a thought. I read in one of Tim Spector's books that the notion of exercise as the best way to lose weight was seized on by companies like Coca Cola who paid for biased research to be done into the merits of exercise - ignoring any evidence that stopping drinking sugary drinks (for example) would have far more benefit to your weight loss goal.

@heyhohello

That would make sense probably. Cycling for me generally is about getting somewhere but it's also useful exercise so I normally do it as fast as I can. Only ever a few miles at once but I hammer it from start to finish. As I've switched over to more cycling I'm trying to keep it like a power endurance type exercise rather than aerobic so mostly I'm just doing short road laps with a hard uphill sprint on a single speed

I wish people really did just read the science.

Absolutely. Movement. Part of daily life movement ( walking to places, gardening, cleaning, Less use of kitchen appliances (so making dough and kneading it, washing by hand etc) all contribute to activity. The major issue most people have is snacking. If babies who are going through the most growth can go 4 hours between feeds, I think adults can.
Just look at family who were alive in the 70s and further back. Very few overweight people and far fewer exercise regimes being relied on to maintain weight.

The major issue most people have is snacking.

Indeed. Plus they generally snack on the wrong thing. How many people snack on apples or carrots instead of crisps, biscuits, chocolate, protein bars...

I do think UPFs are the biggest issue when it comes to the obesity crisis. There's a big correlation between the rise of UPF and waistlines getting bigger.

Snacking may be a symptom of over use of UPF because they're designed to be addictive and to stop your body from realising it's comsumed enough. They also trigger stress responses that we don't fully understand the consequences of yet.

Snacking alone wouldn't explain why every modern nation, all at the same time, all started getting bigger. It would be pretty astonishing if every sex, race, religion, culture, sociatal group and age group all collectively lost their willpower over snacking and exercising, all at once, across all countries if it wan't triggered by something external like UPFs.

That's not to say I believe UPFs magically bypass calories in/calories out, they're just easier to consume in larger quantities and there is some evidence that shows they actually make us hungrier.

When you compare calorific minimally processed foods like cream and butter to things like frozen pizzas and microwave burgers the latter is a lot easier to over-indulge in. You'd be hard pressed to eat 800 calories of fresh cream or butter in one go, 2 Chiago Town pizzas at 400 calories each however...

OP is completely deluded and in la la land , unable to explain themselves adequately, talking about seasons and bears and hibernation, not offering any personal experience, telling everyone to read a book that’s been widely criticised for its inadequate scientific rigour.

The current scientific and medical consensus is that energy balance is what governs weight gain/loss. So until more of the batshit/grifter/Jenkinson/Fung/Spector/Van Tuliken/ stuff gains widespread traction and replication then Energy Balance is the consensus.

As evidenced by plenty on this thread who have used energy balance to lose weight/fat.

I also wanted to add that I believe what you hassan impact in the cravings you get. So lean protein, vegetables and complex carbs, high fiber keep your gut microbiome healthy and reduce cravings making it easier to eat less and loose weight. Sugar, overprocessed food are addictive, mess up your gut microbiome and increase cravings so making it much harder to not
over eat and loose the weight. But it is always calories in calories out in the end.

200ml of double cream doesn't sound like much of a challenge really.

2 Chicago town pizzas though would put me to sleep for a week

Atkins didn't die of a heart attack, he died during surgery for a blood clot in his brain after he slipped on ice.

And he didn't contradict the fact that it comes down to calories in vs calories out. In fact he stated quite clearly in his books that you could follow his diet and you'll still be fat if you simply ate too much within it. He did however challenge the prevailing orthodoxy of the time that the way to lose weight was to restrict fat intake, and along the way pointed out that by reducing carb intake instead, you're much less likely to eat too much (because the protein and fat you're eating makes you feel full).

He was also adamant that regular exercise was a necessary adjunct to any successful diet.

Yeah ever over eating on something like butter coffee is challenging IME

Energy balance definitely matters. Eating more energy than you can metabolise will cause weight gain. It is more nuanced than calories in, calories out and our bodies are less simple and consistent in digestive process than the literal burning of calories in a laboratory.

I think that some of the new information coming out is useful and interesting. Since the 1960s a lot of health advice has worsened public health. Many natural foods that have been parts of varied diets for thousands of years such as butter, red meat or eggs were discouraged. Many studies of the 20th century that demonised tradtional diets were deeply flawed and inadequate but have become embedded into institutional and individual approaches to health.

I'm no scientist, but when I come across some new health advice I consider it against the perspective of social health over time and is the food in question of nutritional value. Is eating 30 plants a week worth doing- yes because it contains a diverse range of nutrients, and is a good way to fill up without feeling deprived. Are seed oils that bad for us- maybe, public health has worsened since they became a more integral part of diets replacing traditional fats such as butter. Should I swap sugar for artificial sweetners- not convinced, I hate the taste, they make me feel bad for hours after, T2 diabetes trends have not reversed as they've become more widespread- I'd rather moderate my use of full sugar knowing it's not good for me rather than feel encouraged to comsume more foods of enhanced sweetness for fewer calories.
I'm receptive to advice that ties in with trends in public health. The typical low-fat swap to a diet version approach has failed public health on many parameters for decades.

Basically is the advice logical, realistic and ties in with healthy traditional eating patterns or is it a total gimmick.

As adult life has gone by, I've generally maintained a healthy weight through periodically reviewing and tweaking my diet and exercise. I've never been "on a diet" as in a temporary restricted plan of foods. What I have noticed over the years is that people who do use the conventional "diet/ light" types of more processed foods have more difficulty in maintaining healthy or target weights, and people who use more natural foods, go for more gentle and habit based approaches tend to have longer lasting results. And better results again for people who have exercise as an established part of their lifestyle rather than as an optimistic way of "burning" calories that's not a sustainable habit, or people that don't exercise at all.

I initially thought butter coffee sounded quite nice, imagining it as some kind of coffee flavoured butter substance similar to peanut butter or as a type of fudge-like sweet substance, then I realised you meant actual coffee, the hot drink, with butter instead of milk and felt slightly ill.

Atkin's had a history of heart disease and cardiac issues including blocked arteries at the time of his death. He No-one knows for certain what caused his death because his family (and the Atkin's Group) refused an autopsy.

200ml of cream is an entire carton. Most "normal" people eg away from the competitive under-eaters of MN, would not consume an entire carton of cream in one session. Frozen pizza is literally designed in a lab by people with decades of food science behind them, to make us want to eat more of it. The majority of healthy adults would not think twice about eating two small frozen pizzas because that's what they were designed to make us want to do. They bypass the body's usual satity ques and make us crave fat, salt and sugar aka more frozen pizza.

It tastes surprisingly okay as it goes. It does just completely kill your desire to eat though. I wasn't trying it for weight loss I was actually looking at it from an increase calories POV but the fact it just stopped me eating meant it wasn't an option.

I didn't say my approach to cream was normal just that 200ml is easy it'll kill my appetite for the same reason as the coffee but I wouldn't at any point be thinking it's difficult to consume

800cal of pizza though, I could eat it easily but I'd have an instant food coma. Cream calories wouldn't do that to me

Frozen pizza always make me want more, either more frozen pizza or some type of hot, savoury pastry, hence why I am currently not eating any frozen pizzas. I can't stop once I start. There's no food coma.

I get an initial feeling of fullness but an hour later I'm starving again and need more, similar to when I eat McDonald's.

Cream, I love, but too much of it makes me feel sick. I definately couldn't drink a full carton of it and then go back for more an hour later.

Butter and coffee I love but I still don't fancy trying them together.

Hot buttery toast I also love but sadly it has the same effect on me as frozen pizza and McDonald's so I'm also not eating that, either. I don't miss maccies or pizza. I do miss toast.

I’ve never understood the allure of pizza. It’s too much bread, not enough tomato with a bit of cheese.

I don’t think your are entirely correct OP. exercise can and does help weight loss- increase in muscle mass, for instance, will lead to an increase in energy requirements to some extent and does affect BMR.

it’s not the ONLY way to lose weight- and on it’s own combined with a poor diet, it absolutely won’t be enough to make the difference between a healthy weight and being overweight. But i don’t think your assertion that exercise has no impact on weight/weight loss is entirely correct.

Iceland's garlic cheese bread is the exact right ratio of cheese, butter, bread and garlic. I don't like many pizzas. I'm not keen on tomato paste, but I had just discovered Chicago Town's philly cheese steak pizza which is why I used those as my example.

I don't miss them the way I do toast but I'm not gonna lie and say I could never eat two of them in one sitting and still want more

I don't tend to overeat very much these days. If I fancy eating too much I just tell myself to look at my watch in 5 minutes or so and then when I do I can tell myself I would have eaten it by then. And I sort of pretend I have. Another thing I do is ask myself if I just want to eat constantly and the answer will be 'no,'.

I do eat chocolate and crisps but in smaller amounts than people generally do. I will have one chocolate with a coffee after a main meal. On a weekend I will have a ramekin full of crisps/other savoury snacks with a drink in the evening and that will be enough.

For main meals I generally make sure half my plate is filled with salad/non starchy veg and the rest a meat/pasta/rice dish such as lasagna. Generally half a standard pub portion. Eating out I like dishes you can share or I order salad/veg side & a starter. I have coffee and a chocolate after lunch and dinner and tea and a biscuit/chocolate in the afternoon. If I have breakfast it is usually eggs on toast sometimes a bacon sandwich, occasionally muesli.

This works out enough to maintain my weight. I am not hungry and eat a good variety of food. I exercise every day, run 10k and walk 5k and do strength and conditioning exercises 4 times a week. I am in my 50s.

I think portion sizes have got bigger over the years. There is a lot of processed food but we generally cook from fresh.

The standard quality of a UK pizza is a crime against humanity.

And I think eating out normalises oversized potions. Some meals are over 2000 calories in one sitting! As a woman, even one who does a significant amount of exercise, I know that is far too much for one meal.

I did read the study you are referring to. It does not support what you are saying here and I think what you are saying is unhelpful at best and misleading at worst.

The study was done on 30 individuals from the hunter-gatherer tribe and an even smaller population from a farming tribe. While the “exercise” effects indeed plateaued in hunters, the farming tribe had a significantly higher TEE than the other two groups (Americans and the hunters). So you could have as well come here and start the topic telling people to take up farming because this is the thing really burns calories!

I do not disagree with the notion that you cannot outrun a bad diet. An average active person probably needs around 2000-2200 kcal a day whereas a modern diet of huge portions and endless snacks adding up to over 4000 kcal a day.

I referred you to the studies into the Blue Zones because they show that physical activity is absolutely essential for maintaining health and lean BMI. And yes, these people do not exercise but come from relatively poor areas where demanding physical jobs such as farming prevail. Their diets are mainly plant-based and low in calories but the overall effect of the calorie restriction cannot be separated from the positive influence of being very active.

And you are, I’m afraid wrong about vegetable fats - if the book you are referring to tells you that olive or rapeseed oils should be replaced with saturated fats, the book could be of better use as a door stopper. If the effect of heat processing on these oils is concerning, both are available in cold-pressed form. If you look at the Okinawan diet for instance, they staple healthy dishes are nearly all stir-fried (on relatively low heat).

i find the Blue Zones studies really interesting too. There’s a documentary series on Netflix called something like The Secrets of the Blue Zones that’s worth a watch for anyone who’s interested.

An average active person probably needs around 2000-2200 kcal a day

@CortieTat, yet if I were sedentary, I would only need about 1500. There are a lot of sedentary people driving to office jobs and then back home and relaxing in front of the tv. Add in the odd takeaway or pub meal and you can see obesity could take hold...

There’s even a book :-) The Okinawa Way about the Okinawan Centenarian Study that has been ongoing for 25+ years. It is quite dated but still an interesting read many common sense ideas.

What I personally found interesting and didn’t know about was how the traditional Okinawan diet was carb heavy (complex carbs only) and low in meat/fish and saturated fats, including lower fish consumption than mainland Japan. It basically looks like the boring and not at all novel dietary guidelines of my own country :-)